Śākya mchog-ldan on gotra in Yogācāra and Madhyamaka

Article

Citation:	Gilks, Peter. "Śākya mchog-ldan on gotra in Yogācāra and Madhyamaka." Paper presented at the 17th Congress of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, Vienna, August 2014.

Abstract

No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:

This paper is being presented as part of a panel on the topic of Reformulations of Yogācāra in Tibet. Particularly, it relates to Tibetan commentary on Abhisamayālaṃkāra (AA) I:39, in which it is taught that the foundation (pratiṣṭhā) for religious practice is the dharmadhātu and that since the dharmadhātu is undifferentiated (asaṃbhedā), there are ultimately no distinct gotras corresponding to the three vehicles. This teaching is usually interpreted as a Mādhyamaka justification for one final vehicle, as opposed to the three-vehicle theory, attributed to Cittamātra/Vijñaptimātratā, and which is closely related to the doctrine of three gotras found in sutras such as Saṃdhinirmocana and Laṅkāvatāra and śāstras such as Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra. However, there are some Tibetan writers outside the influential Gelug tradition who see the equation of gotra with dharmadhātu as an essentially Yogācāra doctrine. This alternative viewpoint implies that Yogācāra and Cittamātra are not, as is commonly held to be the case, the same thing and brings to the fore the question of whether Yogācāra is better understood as a tradition that transcends traditional doxographic categories. Through an analysis of Śākya-mchog-ldan’s explanation of AA I:39, which includes a differentiation of two other terms that are also often held to be synonymous, namely gotra and buddha-essense (or tathāgatagarbha), I aim to highlight some of the ways in which his ‘reformulation’ of Yogācāra implies a reformulation of certain Cittamātra doctrines. Finally, I conclude the paper with a brief discussion on the extent to which doxographical discourse

both restricts and allows for the formulation of an individual point of view. (Gilks, introduction, 1)

References

Brunnhölzl, Karl. The Center of the Sunlit Sky. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion, 2004.

_____. Gone Beyond: The Ornament of Clear Realization, and Its Commentaries in the Tibetan Kagyu Tradition. 2 vols. Vol. 1. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion, 2010.

_____. Luminous Heart. Ithaca NY: Snow Lion, 2009.

Cabezón, José Ignacio. "The Canonization of Philosophy and the Rhetoric of Siddhānta in Tibetan Buddhism." In Buddha Nature: A Festschrift in Honor of Minoru Kiyota, edited by Paul J. Griffiths and John P. Keenan, 7-26. Reno, NV: Buddhist Books International, 1990.

_____. A Dose of Emptiness. Albany NY: State University of New York, 1992.

Chos-dbang-grags-pa'i-dpal. "She Rab Kyi Pha Rol Tu Phyin Pa'i Man Ngag Gi Bstan Bcos Mngon Par Rtogs Pa'i Rgyan Gyi Mthar Thug Pa'i Lta Ba Thal 'Gyur Du 'Grel Tshul Gnad Don Gsal Zla." In Stong Thun Skal Bzang Mig 'Byed. Mundgod: Gaden Jangtse Libary, 2006.

Conze, Edward. The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.

_____. "Maitreya's Abhisamayālaṅkāra." East and West 5 (1954): 192-97.

_____. "Marginal Notes to the Abhisamayālaṃkāra " Sino-Indian Studies 5 (1957): 21-36.

Dreyfus, Georges. "Tibetan Scholastic Education and the Role of Soteriology." Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 20, no. 1 (1997): 31-62.

Dunne, John. "Buddhism, Schools Of: Mahayana Philosophical Schools of Buddhism." In Encyclopedia of Religion, edited by Lindsay Jones, 1203-13. Detroit: Macmillan Reference, 2005.

Griffiths, Paul J. "Painting Space with Colors: Tathāgatagarbha in the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkara Corpus Iv.22-37." In Buddha Nature: A Festschrift in Honor of Minoru Kiyota, edited by Paul J. Griffiths and John P. Keenan, 41-63. Reno: Buddhist Books International, 1990.

Hookham, S. K. The Buddha Within. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991.

Hopkins, Jeffrey. The Essence of Other-Emptiness by Tāranātha. Ithaca & Boulder: Snow Lion, 2007.

_____. Meditation on Emptiness. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1983.

_____. "The Tibetan Genre of Doxography: Structuring a Worldview." In Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre, edited by Jose Ignacio Cabezon and Roger R. Jackson. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 1996.

Kapstein, Matthew. The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism: Conversion, Contestation, and Memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Komarovski, Yaroslav. "Reburying the Treasure—Maintaining the Continuity: Two Texts by Śākya Mchog Ldan on the Buddha Essence." Journal of Indian Philosophy 34 (2006): 521-70.

_____. "Shakya Chokden's Interpretation of the Ratnagotravibhāgha: 'Contemplative' or 'Dialectical'?" Journal of Indian Philosophy 38 (2010): 441-52.

_____. Three Texts on Madhyamaka by Shakya Chokden. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 2000.

_____. Visions of Unity. Albany NY: State University of New York Press, 2011.

Ruegg, David Seyfort. Three Studies in the History of Indian and Tibetan Madhyamaka Philosophy: Studies in Indian and Tibetan Madhyamaka Thought (Vol. 1). Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien., 2000.

Śākya Mchog-ldan. Mgnon Par Rtogs Pa'i Rgyan 'Grel Ba Dang Bcas Pa'i Dka' Ba'i Gnad Rnam Par Bshad Pa Spyi'i Don Nyer Mkho Bsdus Pa Lung Chos Rgya Mtsho Snying Po. Kathmandu: Rigpe Dorje, 2008.

Sparham, Gareth. Ocean of Eloquence. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993.

More on this item

Peter Gilks

Śākya Chokden

Summary

This paper is being presented as part of a panel on the topic of Reformulations of Yogācāra in Tibet. Particularly, it relates to Tibetan commentary on Abhisamayālaṃkāra (AA) I:39, in which it is taught that the foundation (pratiṣṭhā) for religious practice is the dharmadhātu and that since the dharmadhātu is undifferentiated (asaṃbhedā), there are ultimately no distinct gotras corresponding to the three vehicles. This teaching is usually interpreted as a Mādhyamaka justification for one final vehicle, as opposed to the three-vehicle theory, attributed to Cittamātra/Vijñaptimātratā, and which is closely related to the doctrine of three gotras found in sutras such as Saṃdhinirmocana and Laṅkāvatāra and śāstras such as Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra. However, there are some Tibetan writers outside the influential Gelug tradition who see the equation of gotra with dharmadhātu as an essentially Yogācāra doctrine. This alternative viewpoint implies that Yogācāra and Cittamātra are not, as is commonly held to be the case, the same thing and brings to the fore the question of whether Yogācāra is better understood as a tradition that transcends traditional doxographic categories. Through an analysis of Śākya-mchog-ldan’s explanation of AA I:39, which includes a differentiation of two other terms that are also often held to be synonymous, namely gotra and buddha-essense (or tathāgatagarbha), I aim to highlight some of the ways in which his ‘reformulation’ of Yogācāra implies a reformulation of certain Cittamātra doctrines. Finally, I conclude the paper with a brief discussion on the extent to which doxographical discourse both restricts and allows for the formulation of an individual point of view. (Gilks, introduction, 1)

Email us to contribute

Site Guide

To top